Lines in the sand . . .

As has become the norm, there’s a lot going on in Big Canoe to include the ongoing primary election, planned opening of the renovated clubhouse, undisclosed food and beverage losses along with other governance and financial loose ends. The subject matter is all over the board, and for that reason, this post will once again discuss a myriad of topics.

An admonishment . . .

First, as most visitors to this site are probably aware, all posts seen here are most often heavily referenced and documented. In fact, in a sincere quest to be fair and confirm all facts before posting an article, this writer often submits questions via the board approved platform for information known as Ask the POA.

But alas, in response to the latest request regarding food and beverage variances (1) this writer was admonished by the POA Treasurer (a Finance Committee alumni) for a pattern of “excessive inquiries”. What audacity. It was emphasized that this writer had not only burdened the Director of Finance but also himself as the treasurer with these inquiries. Apparently the treasurer is confused as this writer has never contacted him directly with any financial inquiry.

In contrast, the treasurer then oddly suggested that this writer instead visit with the Director of Finance for answers to specific questions rather than burden her with Ask the POA inquiries. Really? Could it be that he would prefer that there be no documented paper trail of her response?

Perhaps he has forgotten or is unaware that this writer did visit with the Director of Finance previously only to be denied access to the accounting records that had been legally requested pursuant to Georgia non-profit code. (2) https://bcmatters.org/alarm-bells/ (This might actually warrant a reread.)

That same mistake will not be repeated again.

Note: Click here to read the treasurer’s response .  Details regarding the food and beverage variances will be discussed in the following two segments.

Deception by omission . . .

A quick review of the June 2025 financials posted to the POA website noted a significant loss and variance to budget in the food and beverage (F&B – shown on the financials as clubhouse) performance despite Bistro revenue exceeding expectations. It is particularly noteworthy that this variance was not mentioned nor highlighted in the General Manager’s July 31^st board presentation. In fact, in the GM’s typical song and dance style, the entire amenity performance slide was omitted from the presentation citing property owner suggestion and/or feedback.  (3a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yymia1pIMCA at 21:10 and (4) https://smokesignalsnews.com/news/july-2025-big-canoe-poa-board-meeting/article_705463ce-74bb-4e50-b8e3-af1b9bd68128.html

Now really? One must certainly question why and even if property owners actually suggested that management provide less financial information rather than more at the monthly board meetings.

And in an unconventional, streamlined and newly titled June Financial Summary – Cash from Operations slide, (5) the GM attributed the overall unfavorable variance in amenity performance to rain at the marina and aquatics while omitting any reference to the larger variance posted to F&B.

Make no mistake. This is clearly deception.

While useful given the insertion of timestamps, it is important to recognize that the recap of the monthly board meeting found in Smoke Signals (4) is merely a recitation of what was said without any verification or review of the actual financial statements. Thus the omission and misinformation is unintentionally perpetuated.

Note: With year to date losses at $363k, F&B could be on track to lose $700k+

As for those food and beverage variances . . .

With a $35k variance to F&B cost of sales during the month of June, an inquiry was submitted requesting an explanation. (1) While $15k was understandably attributed to increased sales, the treasurer stated in his AskThePOA Response#17967  (6) that approximately $10k was written off as spoilage due to a cooler malfunction.

Surely this occurrence warranted mention?

Citing renegotiated pricing contracts, the explanation for the remaining $10k variance is vague and somewhat unclear. Did management overpay the food suppliers? Or could it be that the new chef conducted a physical inventory that required further adjustments? It’s really impossible to tell.

However, considering the significant spoilage write-off, this writer accessed the most recent (May 21^st) health inspection report (7) reflecting an unacceptable rating at the Bistro of only 84.

Click here to view the health inspection report

The report noted that a number of food items were not being maintained at proper cooling temperatures. All items were discarded while the inspector was on-site. Other infractions addressed the sanitation of food contact surfaces and personal cleanliness.

It does not appear that the discarded food components would account for $10k in spoilage reflected on the June financial statements. Based on the treasurer’s response, it appears that additional, significant cooling “malfunctions” took place during June.

Note: This also does not appear to be an anomaly, as the previous inspection dated November 12^th, 2024 reflected a rating of only 89.

Private discussions between the elected POA board and the developer . . .

And now, as noted in a previous post, (8) minutes from the May 19^th closed door board meeting (9) stated “Trademark license for Big Canoe Company is in progress”.

Note: It is unknown why a license agreement would be necessary as Big Canoe Company (the developer) surely must have included the perpetual use of its name as a condition of the sale of the trademarks in 2019 to Big Canoe Brokerage. (8)

Since that time additional discussions were recorded in the minutes of the June 9^th and July 7^th closed door meetings. Given that, the following questions were submitted via Ask the POA.

• • Specifically, what is the purpose of any proposed trademark license agreement with the developer, Big Canoe Company?

  • What is the total cost of these negotiations (attorney fees, administrative expenses, etc.) thus far?

  • What is the current status of this agreement?

  • Will a copy of the agreement be provided to the community once finalized?

While acknowledging the discussions, the POA President’s AskThePOA Response#17759  (10) failed to address several questions while citing the overused disclaimer that the information “does not fall within the definition of the books and records that Property Owners are authorized to review per the governing legal documents of Big Canoe Property Owners Association, Inc. nor under the Georgia Nonprofit Corporation Code”.

Could it be that the POA President does not fully understand that the rights and powers of the developer are clearly outlined in the governing documents of Big Canoe? No more and no less. Any change to these rights whether via enhanced concessions, conditions and/or private deals, etc. must be transparent and subject to approval by the property owners. Private negotiations are a slippery slope that should not be approached lightly.

Property owners should demand that the content of these discussions be made public post haste.

Note: No additional discussions have been included in the closed door meetings since this writer’s original inquiry. It is unknown if continued discussions may have taken place during two plus hours of executive session.

And about those unanswered questions . . .

In a follow-up to the unanswered questions regarding the purpose and amount of legal fees, the POA Vice-President (a Finance Committee alumni) described the legal fees incurred thus far as “relatively minimal”. (11) However, the vice-president has failed to define “relatively minimal” legal fees in dollars when asked.

Speaking of legal fees . . .

Presentation of the June 2025 financial performance at the July board meeting once again contained an accounting adjustment in order to properly capitalize $148k in legal fees (12) associated with the original trademark purchase from Big Canoe Brokerage in accordance with GAAP. Any previously expensed legal fees were reversed and subsequently capitalized.

Despite the treasurer’s explanation (3b)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yymia1pIMCA at 26:30 and the lengthy discussion found in the July 25^th finance committee minutes, (13) it is unknown why the committee members (including two current board candidates) did not insist on the proper treatment of these fees at the onset rather than later as an adjustment. Further, with Mauldin & Jenkins on site at the time, it is unknown why the accountants did not also suggest the proper treatment of these fees.

Note: Those legal fees are now projected to reach $175k.

Trademarks, trademarks, everywhere trademarks . . .

New trademark applications for Big Canoe Brokerage and Big Canoe, LLC are still pending at the USPTO and have not yet been assigned to an examiner. And once again, as noted in previous posts on this site (8) (14), one must ask, why are property owner assessment dollars being used to fund application and attorney fees to trademark the name of a corporation licensed and owned by someone else (Mike Rhodes)?

Seriously,

Is the registration of a Big Canoe Brokerage, LLC trademark an “authorized function” of the Association? For that matter, was the purchase of the “Big Canoe Realty” trademark an authorized function of the Association? (14)

Perhaps concerned property owners might consider filing a notice of opposition with the USPTO.

Note: Meanwhile, a plethora of additional new trademark applications have been filed with the USPTO by the POA board. A search site of pending applications can be found at https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/search/search-information by entering the search term “Big Canoe”.

Flashing back for a moment . . .

During the June 26^th presentation of the annual audit report, the partner with Mauldin & Jenkins stated, “we do look at the Association’s policies and referencing, I believe it’s Article 6, Section 13, you are, in the policies and the covenants, required to have the study, the reserve study, done every five years. We’ve looked at the date, you are within compliance and just so the property owners know, I don’t want to steal management’s thunder, but they are in the process of getting it done right now.” (15) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdQMEC0UVzU at 17:45

As of the last response from the Director of Finance on August 1^st, 2025 a company had not yet been selected to perform the study.

More importantly, while reviewing the Article VI, Section 13 (16) covenant, the Mauldin & Jenkins accountants failed to note that the balance in the Capital Reserve Fund was not being “managed consistent with projected reserve requirements identified by the Capital Reserve Studies”.

Further, the auditors/accountants failed to confirm if the current reserve study was prepared in compliance with the Community Associations Institute, National Reserve Study Standards as required by the Article VI, Section 13 covenant.

For the record, it does not appear that the previous report prepared by Facilities Advisors complied with those requirements. This concern among others has been discussed in great detail in a previous post on this site (17) https://bcmatters.org/mission-accomplished/. It was also addressed with management in 2021 as well as via a current AskThePOA inquiry (18).

In order to determine if management was specifying the CAI, NRSS requirements to potential vendors, a copy of the RFP was requested.

Needless to say, the non-response from the Director of Finance (19) contained the same standard disclaimer to refuse the production of information or documents.

The concern regarding this specific disregard for our governing documents will be addressed further with leadership.

A common thread . . .

Despite the varied subject matter, one commonality that may be observed throughout this post is the often repeated line of communication when responding to property owner questions by stating this “does not fall within the definition of the books and records that Property Owners are authorized to review per the governing legal documents of Big Canoe Property Owners Association, Inc. nor under the Georgia Nonprofit Corporation Code” thereby making each of us as stakeholders have to dig just a little deeper for complete and truthful information.

Unfortunately, the intent of the Georgia non-profit code is being misrepresented by leadership as it does not prohibit the release of any of the information requested in these examples. Instead, it mandates the release of certain information such as accounting records which this board has historically refused to provide.

That said, little if any of the information included in this post was discussed in a board meeting or found in the Smoke Signals recaps. Only by reviewing financial statements, meeting minutes and asking questions can this vital information ever see the sunshine. And even then, we are stonewalled by an out of touch board gone rogue.

We are the stakeholders of this community and should be treated as such.

Now, go out there and vote . . . for the candidate or candidate(s) of your choice.

. . . . .

Should you be interested in the governance and financial information often found in these posts and wish to see additional articles posted in the future, please subscribe for an email notification or check back frequently. And as always, feel free to contact me directly at thepcrosses@gmail.com for questions or further discussion. Meanwhile, take care, stay safe and thank you for your readership.

Patricia Cross

10438 Big Canoe

References:

1)    AskThePOA Ticket#17967 regarding food and beverage variances

2)    “Alarm bells”, June 13^th, 2024, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/alarm-bells/ .

3)    Big Canoe POA board meeting, July 31^st, 2025, video on youtube at: a) 21:10; b) 26:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yymia1pIMCA

4)    https://smokesignalsnews.com/news/july-2025-big-canoe-poa-board-meeting/article_705463ce-74bb-4e50-b8e3-af1b9bd68128.html

5)    June Financial Summary – Cash from Operations slide

6)    AskThePOA Response#17967   

7)    Pickens County Health Inspection report date May 21^st, 2025. Click here for the health inspection report

8)    “An albatross updated”, May 31, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/an-albatross-updated/

9)    Special Board Meeting Minutes, May 19^th, 2025

(POAwebsite>login>meetings>Minutes>2025>May 19^th)

10)   AskThePOA Response#17759 

11)   Followup AskThePOA Response#17759  

12)     June Capital Spend  slide

13)   Finance Committee Meeting Minutes, July 25^th, 2025 (POAwebsite>login>POA>Committees>Finance>Minutes>2025>July

14)   “An albatross”, May 27^th, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/an-albatross/

15)   Big Canoe POA board meeting, June 26^th, 2025, video on youtube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdQMEC0UVzU at 17:45

16)   Article VI, Section 13 

17)   “Mission accomplished”, September 1^st, 2021, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/mission-accomplished/

18)   AskThePOA Ticket#17768

19)   AskThePOA Response#17768